Talk:Phaser cannon
Isomagnetic disintegrator I changed this page from my first edit, because the cannon Worf used in Star Trek: Insurrection is actually called a isomagnetic disintegrator. 14:14, January 26, 2005 Mirror Defiant weapon? This page says that the only one use has been shown for these things... however on the Battle of Terok Nor page it says that the mirror universe's Defiant had Phaser Cannons on it. I am not about to change it cause it is just from an article on here, I did not actually notice this myself. 17:23, May 10, 2005 : I came here from a link on ''Defiant'' (mirror) expecting some of the same information. Anybody know what gives? — THOR 09:49, 10 Sep 2005 (UTC) ::The article was originally created solely for the weapon seen on the back of the Argo buggy, in Star Trek Nemesis. Anyone can update it with more information, especially stuff about the Defiant's weaponry. Zsingaya 10:58, 10 Sep 2005 (UTC) :::the Defiants weapons already have a page, Pulse phaser cannon. do we really need two pages for the same system? -Mithril 21:08, 25 June 2006 (UTC) ::::If there is a difference between the two, then yes, two different pages are needed, imo. (See phase cannon and pulsed phase cannon). --From Andoria with Love 05:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC) Pulse phaser cannon I think some mention could be made of the TOS Enterprise shooting pulsed white phaser blasts (from the nearby/same ports as their phaser beams) in "Balance of Terror" and "Arena" among others; and the Reliant's pulse phaser cannons. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 03:01, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC) : Phaser cannon and pulse phaser cannon - are they the same thing? Zsingaya ''Talk'' 08:41, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC) :: probably. on a related note, the reliant does not mount pulse phasers. look at the phaser effect of the Enterprise in Wrath of Khan, it has the same look and results. the 'pulse' look is just the standard phaser effect of that time. the seemingly high amounts of damage is a result of both ships being unsheilded during the fights. (the enterprise was hit before it can raise sheilds, the reliants having been dropped remotely, and finally both ships sheilds negated in the nebula.) Mithril 06:59, 22 June 2006 (UTC) :::I very much agree, though you should realize phaser blasts -- shipboard or handheld -- were all kinds of colours during TOS from episode to episode, artist to artist. (With the advent of Remastered, the "official" colours could be considered blue for the Ent, red for hand phasers.) But anyways, it's pretty obvious that the Ent-A had pulse capabilities, and that's far before the Dominian War. This should be changed. -- 15:35, December 6, 2006 Phaser phaser rifle This article should cite the pulse phaser rifles seen in First Contact. The Pulse Phaser Cannon article already describes the starship weapons as seen on the Defiant... -- 18:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC) About the Merge So, why is this suggested? Is the two articals considared covering the same thing?--Terran Officer 02:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC) :Um... They describe the same weapon system on the USS Defiant. The articles are almost identically, with the same content worded differently. --''6/6'' ''Subspace'' 21:46, 19 November 2006 (UTC) :I must correct myself. They DO refer to the exact same weapon platform, but they are cumulative, rather than redundant (I assumed redundant, since half of both articles are simply referring to the USS Defiant's weapons). Either way, they belong in the same article. --''6/6'' ''Subspace'' 09:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC) :: Okay, I merged the three pages because they were all essentially the same, HOWEVER, I am not sure if this name is any more canon than "phaser cannon", OR "pulse phaser cannon" because I don't recall ANY references to ANY of these terms, with regards to the Defiant phasers or the Argo cannon. --Alan del Beccio 01:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC) :: Well, after a year, I figured I would revisit this, and I did find references to phaser cannon, but no references to "pulse phaser". I found the phaser cannon reference to the Argo cannon in the script and subsequently found two VOY references to the term, which I guess legitimizes it as the most accurate name. --Alan del Beccio 19:45, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Phaser cannon from All Good Things Why is there No page for Phaser Cannons as was seen on the Enterprise-D in All Good Things..., it insteads redirects to this page why?-- Awar 12:50, 24 May 2007 (UTC). :Read the talk page entries above. Please also note that you do not need to leave the same message on three separate talk pages? -- Sulfur 13:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC) ::The Talk entries above dont adress this issue. There seems to be a difference between a Phaser Cannon and a Pulse Phaser Cannon. The weapon fired from the "Galaxy-X" Enterprise in "All Good Things..." was a beam weapon, not pulsed. There also was a similar instance in the TNG episode "Darmok" where a phaser-type weapon was fired from the forward Phton Torpedo / Probe Launcher. It seems to me that this article should be renamed "Pulse Phaser Cannon" , and a new "Phaser Cannon article created for these weapon systems. It would also need to differentiate between a Phaser Cannon and a Phase Cannon.Riddick 20:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC) PNA Alan above, says there are two Voyager references to "phaser canons", but is there anything to suggest that Defiant's weapons are phaser canons or "pulse phaser canons"? (Alan's gone, so we can't ask him what they were...) The Argo reference is valid from a production materials POV, so it can stand, but the rest of this needs a bad rewriteor to be massively pruned.Capt Christopher Donovan 03:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC) : Actually, I am not. And no, there does not seem to be any specific references to the Defiant's weapons being called "phaser can'n'''ons" nor especially "pulse phaser can'n'ons, or really, anything other than "phasers". This title was chosen because it was the only canon '''term' that would even begin to apply. I suggest if the information is moved or removed, that it be given a section on phaser array (per reference ). --Alan del Beccio 05:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC) That would be acceptable to me, provided the use of "pulse" prior to "phaser canon" could be justified.Capt Christopher Donovan 06:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC) : That is the exact opposite of what I had said. --Alan 15:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)